Here's a nice review on Millard Erickson's Postmodernizing the Faith ... It contains a nice lil' postmodern joke by Middleton and Walsh.
"The first umpire, a modernist, says, "There's balls and there's strikes, and I call 'em the way they are."
The second umpire, a postmodernist, says, "There's balls and there's strikes, and they ain't nothin' until I call 'em."
The third umpire, with whom Middleton and Walsh agree, says, "There's balls and there's strikes, and I call 'em as I see 'em."
Comments
It's a baseball game!
http://sola.blogsome.com/
http://www.challies.com/archives/000710.php
agree with Dan Kimball on the unwarranted "cleverer than thou"
attitude of an apologist. These "smart" apologists can win arguments
but will eventually lose friends or even souls. Our friends may say
things like what Gandhi said" I like christ but not christians". But
I thank God that the christians around me are not like that.(People
like dave chong, leon, john, david ting and steven sim are great
apologists and they do say sorry when necessary) Probably because we
are from a different emerging culture. Let's not forget we are not
only called to be apologists but also ambassadors for christ.
Further, as it is made popular by the Spiderman, "with great powers
come great responsibilites". We got to present the gospel and defend
our faith with knowledge, wisdom and character.(see www.str.org)
On the other hand, we should not, in Malaysian context at least,
present the gospel like a sales person carrying bags selling
merchandise from table to table at a hawker center. In Malaysia, VCD
seller (mostly pirated), lottery tickets sellers or people asking
for donations (hired by donations collection agency, where only 10%
actually go the the intended beneficiary). I am not trying to
belittle them, they are earning a decent living but the general
reflex of the public,when approached by them, is to shake their
heads. Some don't even look at them. Street evangelism has a part to
play but we got to beware of becoming a "nuisance" or "instruder"
of privacy.
With regard to Kimball's comments on saying "I don't know" more
often, I think he may have a point but that may not be a good thing
to do.While we recognise our limited knowledge, I think we should
strife to know the true. Isn't the knowledge of God and the truth is
fundamental to our belief? We will get closer to the truth if not
knowing the absolute truth if we have this hunger for truth. My fear
is that if we say "I don't know" too often, it may become the order
of the day - "we just don't know whether what we believe is true or
not." Where then is our conviction? An apologist without a
conviction? An ambassador who isn't sure which country he is
representing?
Wow, the quotes from Generous Orthodoxy aren't that generous, are they?
McLaren is a pastor at heart, he's best when building bridges or comforting the doubting seekers or perhaps, on raising questions...
When it comes to serious theology and more nuanced analysis, he seems out of his depths. His understanding of reformed theology seems to be a case in point.
How many deconstructionists does it take to screw in a light bulb?
Even the framing of this question makes a grid of patriarchal assumptions that reveals a slavish devotion to phallocentric ideas - such as, technical accomplishment has inherent value, knowledge can be attained and quantities of labor can be determined empirically, all of which makes a discourse which further marginalizes the already disenfranchised.